Types of Batteries

Batteries can be divided into two types: primary or disposable batteries and secondary or rechargeable batteries.

Advantages of Batteries over Fuel Cells

The main advantages of batteries over fuel cells are their:

· Availability

· Portability

· Low cost

· Wide range of operating conditions

Disadvantages of Batteries When Compared to Fuel Cells

Batteries, however, have much shorter life spans and lack the power output of fuel cells. Power outputs of batteries are typically on the order of 100's of watts, whereas fuel cells can provide kilowatt to megawatt outputs, power enough to light a building or fuel a vehicle for hours. Under heavy energy demands, batteries can build up dangerous levels of heat and pressure, degrading the battery and possibly causing leaks of toxic compounds or even explosions. In addition, the limited life of primary batteries and the limited cycle life (number of times it can be recharged) of most secondary batteries necessitates the need for disposal of often dangerous and toxic battery materials.

Common Types of Primary and Secondary Batteries

Table 1 summarizes some of the common types of primary and secondary batteries.

Table 1. Some common types of Batteries.

	Battery Type	Anode	Cathode	Electrolyte	Advantages	Disadvantages
Primary Batteries	Alkaline Cell	Zn	MnO2	KOH	High energy density, long shelf life, good leak resistance, performs well under heavy or light use.	Costlier than zinc-carbon cell but more efficient
	Aluminum/Air Cell	Al	O2	KOH or neutral salt solution	Can operate exposed to sea water (neutral salt solution), easily replaceable electrolytes/electrodes	Anode quickly degrades, short shelf life, short operational life
	Leclanché Cell (Zinc Carbon or Dry Cell)	Zn	MnO2	NH4Cl or ZnCl2	Cheap and common (oldest available battery type)	Poor performance under heavy or continuous use.
	Lithium Cell	Li	Various liquid or solid materials	SOCl2, SO2Cl2, or organic solutions	Very high energy density, long shelf life, long operational life	Poor performance under heavy use, vulnerable to leaks or explosions
	Mercury Oxide Cell	Zn or Cd	HgO	KOH	Higher energy density than (Zn/MnO2) alkaline cell	High cost and being phased out due to toxicity concerns
	Zinc/Air Cell	Zn	O2	KOH	Environmentally benign, cheap, very high energy density, and virtually unlimited shelf life	Short operational life, low power density
Secondary (rechargeable) Batteries	Iron Nickel Cell	Fe	Ni(OH)2	KOH	Long life under a variety of conditions, excellent back-up battery	Low rate-performance, slow recharge rate
	Lead/Acid Cell	Pb	PbO2	dilute H2SO4(aq)	Low cost, long life cycle, operates well under a variety of conditions. Common car batteries	Minor risk of leakage
	Lithium Ion Cell	C, carbon compounds	Li2O, intercalated into graphite	LiPF6, LiBF4, related compounds	Relatively cheap, high energy density, long shelf life, long operational life, long cycle life	Minor risk of leakage
	Nickel/Cadmium Cell	Cd	Ni(OH)2	KOH	Good performance under heavy discharge and/or low temperature	High cost, can temporary loose cell capacity if not fully discharged before recharging (memory effect)
	Nickel/Metal Hydride (NiMH) Cell	Lanthanide or Ni alloys	Ni(OH)2	KOH	High capacity and power density	High cost, some memory effect
	Nickel/Zinc Cell	Zn	NiO	KOH	Low cost, low toxicity, good for high discharge rates	Zinc on the electrolyte tends to redeposit unevenly on anode, severely reducing efficiency
	Sodium/Sulfur Cell	Molten Na	Molten S	Al2O3	Inexpensive materials, long cycle life, high energy and power	High operational temperature lower efficiency, some danger of explosion upon degradation

Primary Components of a Battery

The primary component materials of a battery are the anode, cathode, electrolyte, and semi-permeable materials. In addition various catalysts have been used to enhance the performance of electrodes. For example, ruthenium(IV) oxide is used as a catalyst in a vanadium redox battery system. Table 1 summarizes some of the types of electrodes and electrolytes used in common batteries. Many advanced battery designs focus upon new materials for these key components.
Lithium Ion Batteries

Much of the recent battery work has focused on lithium-ion batteries, since they are the primary power source for the ever-growing field of small, rechargeable electronic devices. Nickel sulfide (Aldrich product 34,247-5), for example, was recently explored as a cathode material for rechargeable lithium batteries.2 Current research is also concerned with some very mundane materials in electrodes. New morphologies of graphite flakes, as a case in point, have been studied as anode material in lithium-ion batteries.3 Electrolytes are also very important in battery performance. An LiBF4 solution, for example in a butyrolacetone/ethylene carbonate solution has proven to be a highly conductive and highly thermally stable electrolyte for lithium-ion batteries.

Batteries and fuel cells are electrochemical cells used to generate an external electrical current. They consist of an anode, where oxidation occurs, a cathode, where reduction occurs, and an electrolyte through which ions can travel between electrodes (see Figure 1 for a schematic of a common battery cell). In fuel cells (discussed below), one or both of the reactants are supplied from an external source to the cell. Though technically fuel cells, if the only reactant supplied to the cell is atmospheric oxygen, the cells are then considered batteries (zinc/air or aluminum/air cells for example).

Figure 1. Schematic for an electrochemical cell.

Primary and Secondary Batteries and Their Differences

Batteries can be divided into two types: primary or disposable batteries and secondary or rechargeable batteries. The main advantages of batteries over fuel cells are their availability, portability, low cost, and wide range of operating conditions. Batteries, however, have much shorter life spans and lack the power output of fuel cells. Power outputs of batteries are typically on the order of 100's of watts, whereas fuel cells can provide kilowatt to megawatt outputs, power enough to light a building or fuel a vehicle for hours. Under heavy energy demands, batteries can build up dangerous levels of heat and pressure, degrading the battery and possibly causing leaks of toxic compounds or even explosions. In addition, the limited life of primary batteries and the limited cycle life (number of times it can be recharged) of most secondary batteries necessitate the need for disposal of often dangerous and toxic battery materials. Table 1 summarizes some of the common types of primary and secondary batteries.

Table 1. Common battery types.

	Battery Type	Anode	Cathode	Electrolyte
Primary Batteries	Alkaline Cell	Zn	MnO2	KOH
	Aluminum/Air Cell	Al	O2	KOH or neutral salt solution
	Leclanché Cell (Zinc Carbon or Dry Cell)	Zn	MnO2	NH4Cl or ZnCl2
	Lithium Cell	Li	Various liquid or solid materials	SOCl2, SO2Cl2, or organic solutions
	Mercury Oxide Cell	Zn or Cd	HgO	KOH
	Zinc/Air Cell	Zn	O2	KOH
Secondary (rechargeable) Batteries	Iron Nickel Cell	Fe	Ni(OH)2	KOH
	Lead/Acid Cell	Pb	PbO2	dilute H2SO4(aq)
	Lithium Ion Cell	C, carbon compounds	Li2O, intercalated into graphite	LiPF6, LiBF4, related compounds
	Nickel/Cadmium Cell	Cd	Ni(OH)2	KOH
	Nickel/Metal Hydride (NiMH) Cell	Lanthanide or Ni alloys	Ni(OH)2	KOH
	Nickel/Zinc Cell	Zn	NiO	KOH
	Sodium/Sulfur Cell	Molten Na	Molten S	Al2O3

Table 1 (cont). Common battery types.

	Battery Type	Advantages	Disadvantages
Primary Batteries	Alkaline Cell	High energy density, long shelf life, good leak resistance, performs well under heavy or light use.	Costlier than zinc-carbon cell but more efficient
	Aluminum/Air Cell	Can operate exposed to sea water (neutral salt solution), easily replaceable electrolytes/electrodes	Anode quickly degrades, short shelf life, short operational life
	Leclanché Cell (Zinc Carbon or Dry Cell)	Cheap and common (oldest available battery type)	Poor performance under heavy or continuous use.
	Lithium Cell	Very high energy density, long shelf life, long operational life	Poor performance under heavy use, vulnerable to leaks or explosions
	Mercury Oxide Cell	Higher energy density than (Zn/MnO2) alkaline cell	High cost and being phased out due to toxicity concerns
	Zinc/Air Cell	Environmentally benign, cheap, very high energy density, and virtually unlimited shelf life	Short operational life, low power density
Secondary (rechargeable) Batteries	Iron Nickel Cell	Long life under a variety of conditions, excellent back-up battery	Low rate-performance, slow recharge rate
	Lead/Acid Cell	Low cost, long life cycle, operates well under a variety of conditions. Common car batteries	Minor risk of leakage
	Lithium Ion Cell	Relatively cheap, high energy density, long shelf life, long operational life, long cycle life	Minor risk of leakage
	Nickel/Cadmium Cell	Good performance under heavy discharge and/or low temperature	High cost, can temporary loose cell capacity if not fully discharged before recharging (memory effect)
	Nickel/Metal Hydride (NiMH) Cell	High capacity and power density	High cost, some memory effect
	Nickel/Zinc Cell	Low cost, low toxicity, good for high discharge rates	Zinc on the electrolyte tends to redeposit unevenly on anode, severely reducing efficiency
	Sodium/Sulfur Cell	Inexpensive materials, long cycle life, high energy and power	High operational temperature lower efficiency, some danger of explosion upon degradation

Component Materials in a Battery

The primary component materials of a battery are the anode, cathode, electrolyte, and semi-permeable materials. In addition various catalysts have been used to enhance the performance of electrodes. For example, ruthenium(IV) oxide (238058) is used as a catalyst in a vanadium redox battery system. Table 1 summarizes some of the types of electrodes and electrolytes used in common batteries. Many advanced battery designs focus upon new materials for these key components.
Current Research Areas in Battery Development

Much of the recent battery work has focused on lithium-ion batteries, since they are the primary power source for the ever-growing field of small, rechargeable electronic devices. Nickel sulfide (343226), for example, was recently explored as a cathode material for rechargeable lithium batteries. Current research is also concerned with some very mundane materials in electrodes. New morphologies of graphite flakes, as a case in point, have been studied as anode material in lithium-ion batteries. Electrolytes are also very important in battery performance. A lithium tetrafluoroborate (LiBF4 255815) solution, for example in a butyrolacetone/ethylene carbonate solution has proven to be a highly conductive and highly thermally stable electrolyte for lithium-ion batteries.
High Purity Inorganics

Sigma-Aldrich maintains the highest standards for quality control and quality assurance. High-purity materials are rigorously analyzed by a variety of techniques including trace metals analysis by ICP, which can detect impurities an order of magnitude below ppm levels. Fuels cells and batteries often require high purity components. For example, the electrolytes in low-temperature rechargeable batteries can be from alkyl carbonates and high purity lithium salts of the form LiEF6 (E = P, As).

High purity inorganics also find significant industrial usage. More than 60% of the industrially used cadmium is in Ni-Cd batteries, of which 75% is found in cellular phones. Much of the remainder of this portion is also used in the telecommunications industry as materials in emergency power supplies for electronic telephone exchanges.
Liquid Electrolytes

The type of electrolyte used for a fuel cell depends upon the choice of fuel cell (see Table 1). The key role of the electrolyte is to create a medium through which ions can move between the anode and the cathode. Electrolytes can also act as a kind of filter, preventing undesirable ions or electrons from disrupting the desired chemical reactions.
Plasticizers and Binders

The use of plasticizers in commercial polymer formulations to decrease Tg and the internal viscosity, and to increase bulk flexibility is a well-established practice in a multitude of industrial applications. In fact, the “new car smell” enjoyed by many car owners results mainly from the phthalate plasticizer vaporized in the closed car interior, and actually advertises the deterioration of the vinyl upholstery. To improve the permanence of the plasticizer higher-molecular-weight phthalates are commonly used for modern car interiors. A number of criteria are considered in choosing a plasticizer, including cost, compatibility, stability, ease of processing, and permanence. In addition to the aforementioned uses, a growing body of research has emerged over the past two decades on the application of plasticized polymers in areas that involve properties not usually associated with polymers. For example, the introduction of oligomeric poly(ethylene glycols) (PEG) and derivatives as plasticizers, to effect a significant increase in ionic conductivity as solid polymer electrolytes (SPEs), for use in high energy density batteries and other solid-state electrochemical devices.

Cellulose triacetate membranes, plasticized with 2-nitrophenyl octyl ether, are used as materials for separations. They are impermeable to metal cations, but allow anion

Exchange20 and are also remarkably permeable to neutral, mono- and disaccharides. Highly efficient photorefractive polymer composites can be formed using 9-ethylcarbazole (ECZ) as a plasticizer in guest-host polymers.

Background

ABRESIST® basalt lined steel pipe used to convey abrasive bottom ash at American Electric Power's Gavin Plant consists of 12 lines of 10" and 12" ID ABRESIST pipe. Older ABRESIST pipe, still serviceable after almost 20 years of use, was interspersed with the new ABRESIST pipe.
Coal Fired Electricity Generating Plant

American Electric Power's (AEP) Gavin Power Plant located on the Ohio River in Cheshire, OH is the largest electricity generating station in Ohio.

Built in 1973 with operation beginning in 1974, the plant has a generating capacity of 2.6 million kilowatts and consists of two-1.3 million kilowatt units. Energy created by the power plant is pumped into a grid which supplies power to a seven state area.

The coal fired plant burns about 20,000 tons of coal daily or 6 million tons of coal annually when both units are functioning. The bituminous coal burned by the plant has an ash content of 19%. With a consistency of coarse sand, the bottom ash is extremely abrasive.
Abrasion Resistant Basalt Lined Pipe

In 1973, ABRESIST basalt lined pipe and elbows were installed during initial construction. The straight sections of pipe had a 7/8" thick basalt lining. The elbows had an 11/8" wall.
Low Levels Of Pipe Wear

When AEP installed scrubbers at the plant recently, the bottom ash pipe had to be moved to make room for the new equipment. As workers removed the original basalt pipe they discovered that much of it had withstood 19 years of erosion associated with bottom ash and was reusable.

The straight sections placed in 1973 showed only 20% wear. The original elbows received more abrasion from the change in flow direction and showed more wear. The basalt lined pipe has handled all of the plant's bottom ash since its construction and is still use.
Durability and Pricing

According to AEP officials, the durability of the basalt lined pipe coupled with Abresist's competitive pricing were deciding factors in deciding to go with Abresist again. For the new construction, workers laid 4000' of 10" pipe and 2500' of 12" basalt lined steel pipe. The original basalt lined pipe was interspersed with the new pipe. Any pipe not reused was stockpiled for future use.

The new 10" and 12" pipe came in 18' sections and was epoxy coated. Like the original pipe, the straight sections had 7/8" basalt lining; the elbows had 1-1/8" lining.

Background

Tampa Electric Company (TEC), Tampa, Florida, is no stranger to ash line maintenance. Its Big Bend Station, located 15 miles south of Tampa in Apollo Beach and its Gannon Station, located just 10 miles north of Big Bend on Tampa Bay, are both coal-fired power plants. Thousands of feet of pipe snake through the plants, conveying the abrasive bottom and fly ash created by the burning of the coal. Big Bend Station with a 1755 MW capacity is TEC's newest and largest power plant. It provides more than half of the company's total generating capability. The Station burns approximately 14,000 tons of bituminous Kentucky coal every day.

Big Bend Units One, Two and Three with a combined capacity of 1285 MW, burn low sulfur coal. Big Bend Four with a 470 MW capacity burns standard sulfur coal and is equipped with a flue gas desulfurization system (FGD) or "scrubber" to remove the sulfur, one of the first to be designed and installed in the United States to produce commercial grade gypsum as a by-product.
Transporting Abrasive Materials

Built between 1957 and 1967, Gannon Station has six service units and a capacity of 1230 MW. It burns low sulfur coal. At both plants, the company had experienced problems with hardened steel and cast iron slag sluice lines. The hardened steel lines lasted an average of eight to 18 months; the cast iron sections often had to be changed or rotated every four to six months.

Mike Zsuffa, a technician at TEC, said, "We tried a little bit of everything. Mild steel and fiberglass. Slag is just very, very abrasive."
Pipe Abrasion Testing

In the late 1970s, plans to build Big Bend Four and conversion plans at Gannon Station provided TEC with an opportunity to solve its persistent pipeline abrasion problems. TEC engineering set up an on-site test to determine what type of pipe could withstand the abrasive ash. Several pipe manufacturers were invited to submit samples for testing.

Eight manufacturers of PVC pipe, unlined fiberglass pipe, fiberglass pipe lined with ceramic tile, carbon steel, cast iron, basalt lined pipe and ceramic component pipe submitted samples. To ensure fairness, the test pipe was installed in similar locations and in areas where wear was usually most severe.
ABRESIST Basalt Lined Pipe

Some of the test pipe failed in minutes, some in hours. Others lasted months and longer. A basalt-lined pipe manufactured by Abresist Corporation, Urbana, Indiana, was among the pipes that lasted the longest and was still in service where it was tested until it was replaced in 1990. Commenting on the results, Rex Morgado, Tampa Electric Engineering Technician, said, "The amount of wear was significant in all the others, but not ABRESIST®."
Cost Evaluations

TEC officials reviewed the results and talked with another utility that used the basalt lined pipe. After factoring in cost evaluations and a ten-year warranty from Abresist, they chose to install the basalt lined pipe.

The ten-year warranty was twice the normal usually given. Abresist asked only that they be allowed to inspect the pipe at five and ten year intervals.
Installation

Two, mile long, ten-inch basalt pipelines were installed at Big Bend. One pipeline conveys bottom ash; the other line conveys fly ash. Jetpulsion™ power drives the ash and water through the pipe at a velocity of eight to 12' per second. Big Bend is a closed loop system so the water from the slurry is run through weirs to retention ponds for reuse.
Pipeline Conversion

At the same time TEC was building Big Bend Four, they were converting some of the units at Gannon Station to coal-fired units. Initially, all six units burned coal. During the 1970s, four of the units had been converted to oil-fired to meet environmental requirements. The other two units had continued to burn low-sulfur coal.

In the early 1980s as oil prices began to rise, TEC reconverted the oil burning units to coal burning units that used low-sulfur coal.

During the conversion, TEC installed approximately 1200' of 8" ABRESIST basalt lined pipe to convey bottom ash slurry from Gannon One, Two, Three and Four to dewatering bins. Over ten million gallons of saltwater and bottom ash slurry are moved through the pipe at 110 psi by high pressure saltwater pumps.
Long Term Results

Over the long haul, how did the basalt lined pipe withstand the abrasion?
5 Year Results

In 1989, at the five-year warranty inspection at Big Bend and Gannon, the straight pipe showed little to no wear. At elbows and turns, where the flow direction changes and wear is usually most severe, there was only an 3.18mm (1/8") of wear or less. ABRESIST elbow lining is 30mm (1.18") thick while standard straight pipe is 22.3mm (7/8"). In some places, the swirl pattern from the original manufacturing process was still evident.
10 Year Results

At the ten-year inspection in July 1994 at Big Bend Four, the basalt pipe once again showed little wear, even in the elbows. Some of the original glazing was even still visible.

During the ten-year inspection at Gannon Units One, Two and Four showed some wear, about 4mm (.158") was observed near the pipe ends. The rest of the pipe showed little wear.

At Gannon Unit Three, one 90 degree elbow exhibited more wear, about 8-10mm (.316" to .394"). This same elbow was inspected at the five-year mark.

Morgado was on hand at both the five- and ten-year warranty inspection. He said, "Even though the wear was atypical, there was not much difference between the five- and ten-year inspections with this elbow."
Maintenance Cost Savings

Commenting on the warranty inspections, Morgado said, "The pipe didn't need to be turned at the five-year inspection and this time (at the ten-year inspection) it didn't need to be turned either. The basalt lined pipe has saved ten years of yearly maintenance and related costs."

Due to the excellent performance of the basalt lined pipe, TEC subsequently installed ABRESIST pipe in Gannon Five and Six and Big Bend One, Two and Three. Morgado said, "Based on previous experience with the basalt pipe, we installed ABRESIST to convey all of the bottom ash at Gannon."

Background

The Advanced Research Analytical Service team has the technical knowledge, experience, and tools to fulfil all of your contract lab needs. Our team of highly trained engineers will provide you with superior service and support throughout sample analysis. We offer quick sample turnaround with the highest quality results. We have the ability to help our clients solve problems occurring in a current product line, with laboratory analysis overflow, and new product development.

Our capabilities include, but are not limited to:

· High Resolution Imaging

◦ Both Standard SEM and Environmental SEM

· Compositional Analysis

◦ Energy Dispersive Spectrometry (EDS)

◦ X-ray Fluorescence (XRF)

· Cathode Luminescence (CL)

· Cross-sectional Structural Analysis

◦ Focused Ion Beam Tool (FIB)

◦ Precision Milling

◦ Pt and W depositions

· TEM Sample Preparation

◦ Micromanipulator

· Topographical Surface Scans

◦ Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM)

◦ Magnetic Force Microscopy (MFM)

◦ Backscatter Detection

· Computer Controlled Automated Measurement

Background

The presence of toxic pollutants in the air has been a subject of research for many years in the United States and countries around the world. In the United States, air quality standards are governed by the “Clean Air Act” and administered by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). One of the key areas of concern for the US EPA is the Suspended Particulate Matter content (SPM) of air. Historically, the measurement of SPM in air was concentrated on total suspended particulates with no preference to size selection. However, more recent research on the health effects of SPM in ambient air has focused increasingly on particles that can be inhaled into the respiratory system, i.e. particles of aerodynamic diameter of < 10 μm. These particles are referred to as PM10 (2.5 – 10 μm) and PM2.5 (< 2.5 μm). Not withstanding chemical toxicity, it is now generally recognized that these particles are a significant threat to health.
Determining the Composition of Particulates in Air Pollution

The measurement of the elemental composition of the particulate matter is a key factor in understanding the long-term health effects of pollution. Suspended particulate matter is typically pre-concentrated using high volume air samplers and collected on Teflon filters. The chemical analysis of the SPM on these air filters is traditionally performed by energy-dispersive XRF (EDXRF) using EPA method IO-3.3. EPA method IO-3.3 outlines the protocol for the analysis of 44 elements on Teflon air filters, but significant advances in the development of EDXRF instrumentation and software have occurred since this method was published. This application study demonstrates the performance of the Epsilon 5 EDXRF analyzer according to the EPA method IO-3.3, with the elemental range extended from 44 to 55 elements.
Measurement Criteria and Calibration

The air filters application used in this study was set up according to EPA method IO-3.3.The analytical measurement parameters were optimized to accommodate the technological improvements incorporated into the Epsilon 5.

The method was set up and calibrated with 59 commercially available air filter standards and a blank sample from Micromatter Co. (Eastsound, WA). The standards were composed of pure elements and compounds deposited on 40mm Nucleopore media.

The calibration was established using a single standard and a blank for each element. A Fundamental Parameter (FP) method was used to correct for the difference in sample loading when analyzing unknowns.

The measurement parameters used for this application are shown in table 1. The measurement time per condition was 100 seconds, except for the CaF2 target 600 seconds. The measurement time for each condition can be optimized according to specific needs.

Performance

The Epsilon 5 software features a very powerful deconvolution algorithm, which analyzes the sample spectrum and determines the net intensities of element peaks, even when they overlap one another. The accuracy with which this is carried out is essential to trace element analysis. Figure 1 shows a fitted spectrum of air filter standard NIST 2783 obtained with the Ge secondary target. The extremely low background is a consequence of the polarizing optical path.

Precision

The total method precision is a combination of instrument precision and stability of the sample during the measurement. The method precision can be reported for both short (repeatability) and long term (reproducibility) measurements. The repeatability of the Epsilon 5 was assessed by measuring a single filter sample (NIST 2783) 20 consecutive times in a single day. The reproducibility was determined by measuring the same sample once per day over a 10-day period.

The repeatability and reproducibility data for a selection of elements are shown in table 2. No drift correction was applied during the precision studies. The repeatability and reproducibility are both excellent and for most elements the short and long term precision are nearly identical. Comparison of the relative RMS values with the counting statistical error (theoretically, the minimum possible error) shows the excellent precision of the instrument and the non-destructive nature of the method for analyzing filter samples. Figure 2 gives a graphical representation of the short and long-term stability of Cr and Cu.